From: Randy Saaf
Sent: Wed 11-Apr-07 21:24
To: Jay Mairs; Ben Grodsky; Ty Heath; Ivan Kwok; Ben Ebert
Subject: Fw: .edu filtering
Universal is curiouse if we have any historical data over the last 3 months that show whether .edu IP addresses on p2p have gone down.
They want to see if their lawsuits are getting students to stop using p2p (take a moment to laugh to yourself).
Let me know if anyone has any ideas.
—– Original Message —–
From: Benjamin, David
To: Randy Saaf
Sent: Wed Apr 11 18:11:50 2007
Subject: .edu filtering
How are you doing with this?
User_talk:LegalProf - User also attempted to delete this section.
FYI...My actions have merely been to delete the links to the illegally obtain emails, which contain extensive private and confidential information about MediaDefender employees. I have also provided information for people who may not be aware of the possible legal repercussions involved in disseminating these emails. I do not intend to delete the discussion section as I believe that an accurate and valid discussion of the issues is a good thing. So, I encourage everyone to continue the discussion with the link to these emails (as well as any personal information about the employees) left out. -- Legalprof
California law is not the world. It doesn't apply to the whole internet. -- 126.96.36.199
True. California law does not necessarily apply to the whole world. However, MediaDefender is a California corporation and the MediaDefender employees are California citizens. As a result, California has jurisdiction over these acts. --Legalprof
I'm a lawyer. I do muti-jurisdictional corporate law. That "legal" argument about jurisdiction holds about as much water as my sock. If you think you can prove the novel proposition of law that you've just put forth, then why don't you trot it out in a court of law and see how long your imaginary horse can dance. Until then, stop vandalizing the wikipedia entry. You're full of crap, you shill. -- 188.8.131.52
“The leak of MediaDefender’s emails caused quite some controversy, Ironically, in a recently leaked phone call, a New York attorney and MediaDefender discuss the security of their email-server. Whilst there is some initial confusion as to where the leak may have originated, they eventually write it off as some technical problem.
The leaked phone call shows that they are unsure about their network protection, their IDS etc. One of the parties is on a VOIP connection which may explain how the leak was obtained.
Similar to the e-mail leak, a group called ‘MediaDefender-Defenders’ released the file, and in the .nfo file we read:MediaDefender-Defenders proudly presents some more internal MediaDefender stuff… more will follow when time is ready. MediaDefender thinks they’ve shut out their internals from us. Thats what they think.The subject of the call is rather serious. MediaDefender is apparently involved in an ongoing Child Porn investigation. Their job is to identify child-porn images and report the IPs of the offending computers back to the government. A tricky project since it would mean that they actually have to download and rate the illegal content.
This wont be the end of the leaks according to the ‘MediaDefender-Defenders’, they claim that more will follow when time is ready.
In addition the the phone call, a huge MySQL database dump from a MediaDefender server was leaked on BitTorrent as well. The database shows tracking and decoy file information for the Gnutella network which is used by P2P clients such as LimeWire.
All this leaked information is a huge blow for MediaDefender, and it will undoubtedly cost them a lot of time and money to clean this up. Interestingly, no evidence can be found that MediaDefender is actually involved in prosecuting or gathering evidence against filesharers (as we reported earlier). Their core business is releasing fake files and polluting the filesharing networks.”
MediaDefender-Defenders proudly presents some more internal MediaDefender stuff… more will follow when time is ready. MediaDefender thinks they’ve shut out their internals from us. Thats what they think.
Even though someone may have [sold drugs], as charged by the government, if it was the result of entrapment then he is not guilty. Government agents entrapped him if three things occurred:
- First, the idea for committing the crime came from the government agents and not from the person accused of the crime.
- Second, the government agents then persuaded or talked the person into committing the crime. Simply giving him the opportunity to commit the crime is not the same as persuading him to commit the crime.
- And third, the person was not ready and willing to commit the crime before the government agents spoke with him.
On the issue of entrapment the government must prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant was not entrapped by government agents.
"The e-mails contain information about the personal life of MediaDefender employees as well. One particularly ironic example can be found in an e-mail sent by [Jay] Mairs [who sent all of his company e-mails to a Gmail account, which was eventually infiltrated and was] the MediaDefender employee whose technical ineptitude was ultimately responsible for the leak. 'I was out of the office yesterday because my son stuck something up his nose and I had to take him to urgent care. I guess we know where he gets his smarts from ; )' The NBC Universal representative who received that e-mail replied sympathetically, 'Haha. I hope it wasn't a crayon.'" *
David Benjamin (Universal Music employee): is there kiddie porn on newsgroups
Randy Schaaf (MediaDefender founder), to his staff: Without downloading, can anyone tell me if there is kiddie porn on news groups?
Schaaf, to Benjamin: There looks like there is a fair amount. Is this a play at ISP liability?
source, edited for brevity by myself
« Older What would make origami cool?... | Fuck the Mayberry Away. In wh... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments
Buy a Shirt